One creationist view is that there was only one short ice-age, lasting about 700 years. Yet, way back in the 1960s, I read the views of Prof Hannington Enoch*, who said there were no ice ages, but that the various phenomena were caused by immense hydraulic pressure – water, the great Flood. So, which view is correct? The current view might, or might not, be correct. For me, Enoch’s view is closer to truth (I am not aware of him changing his mind later).

(*Note; Prof Enoch taught in Madras India. The book I read was published in 1966, so I read it first-hand: ‘Evolution or Creation?’, soon after my salvation. Enoch died in 1988).

As I have said elsewhere, given that the earth is only about 6,000 years old, there could not have been many long-era ice-ages. I can accept that the Flood brought about a vast number of physical changes to the world, with new weather activities. There might even have been a short-lived ice age as a result of this unimaginable change. But, frankly, I doubt it happened as some creationists think it did.

As part of the evidence given in support of a third-of-the-world ice-age, it is said that Job mentions it. But, as a strict researcher, I see that Job’s words can offer a different view. For example:

“My brethren have dealt deceitfully as a brook, and as the stream of brooks they pass away;

Which are blackish by reason of the ice, and wherein the snow is hid:” (Job 6:15,16).

I have no wish to upset creationist friends, but this is not a ‘proof’ that Job knew of vast ice planes stretching to a third of the world. It only proves that he knew about ice and snow. He was probably referring to a temporary seasonal weather activity, and this is found in verse 17 and 18, which suggests seasonal weather rather than a longer-standing thick layer of ice covering a huge area of the earth:

“What time they wax warm, they vanish: when it is hot, they are consumed out of their place.

The paths of their way are turned aside; they go to nothing, and perish.”

Perhaps my creationist friends (for that is what they are) are right, but I look at the same texts and interpret differently – Job speaks of ice and snow vanishing when it is hot... this would not have been said if Job lived amidst thick ice sheets. Also, if ice covered one third of the world, why is it not documented in the rest of scripture?

Enoch said that what appeared to be caused by an ice-age was actually caused by the tremendous pressure of water from the Flood... the physical changes giving the same kind of effect.

There is also a slight problem with the idea about animals, which needs more explanation. It is true that different animals can survive cold or hot areas of the world. But, to say that some were equipped for the cold needs elucidation, otherwise atheists could read that and say it was proof of evolution. Perhaps the creationists meant they were equipped for the cold by innate genetic coding that produced needed coats of fur only when needed. Indeed, this is possibly what they intended to say. Otherwise, why should the Creator create animals with the capability to live in an ice environment if there was no ice at creation and no possibility of such an environment for at least 2000 years? It would only be because the animals in question already had the genetic requirements at Creation. That is, if a great ice-age actually occurred.

Am I saying that an ice age did not occur? No, only that the proofs, to me, are wanting, so I urge our friends to supply such proofs, which must surely be covered by more than about four verses in scripture that can possibly have another interpretation? Siberia (and similar areas) is mostly snow and ice and appears to have been this way for many centuries. The ground underneath is frozen because sun cannot melt the surface fast enough and there is permafrost. But, even this does not prove a one-third-of-the-world ice age for seven hundred years...even places like Alaska and Siberia have periods of melting and greenery. At best it is coincidental rather than a long-standing effect of an ice-age.

And, did the woolly mammoths die out because they could not find enough vegetation in the ice pack? Surely if God created mammoths to live in ice, He would have given them the necessary plant life, even in ice? It seems far more likely that human beings hunted these slowish beasts for meat, clothing and housing materials, thus eradicating this family-type of animal.

In this note I have only given a few reasons why I do not think an ice-age existed for as long as 700 years... perhaps my mind has been skewed by the book by Dr Enoch! Even so, my queries are pertinent and could be correct, because no-one really knows for sure what happened after the Flood, though we can all make ‘educated guesses’. And this is all my note is about – freedom to think away from the mainstream. Am I right or am I wrong? I cannot say for certain. Readers must examine the facts themselves. Not from custom or emotion, but by looking at presented arguments. It is essential that Christian thinkers are not hampered by given-knowledge and do not go along a variety of avenues of thought that also support Creation and scripture. The divergence of thought in no way subverts thinking along slightly different lines, and must not be allowed to do so, for Christian thought is already under attack from atheistic, demonic sources.

We urge all Christians to read what they can from creationist sources, but also to learn what atheists and evolutionists say, so that logical and cogent arguments can be put forward. It would also strengthen their own faith. It is bound to because they will believe what scripture says! Remember that whatever scripture says is 100% true and factual, even where texts do not use language acceptable to evolutionist scientists (who will reject anything with ‘God’ in it anyway, and thus are very unscientific in their work and ideas).